lxmike
M2 fan.
I bought an x100 original from a fellow RFF member a few year back and its been everywhere with me, its coming to the end of its working life I feel, anyway, I own an XE-1 and a X-Pro1 but have seen a x100s black edition advertise locally, (at a good price). So what does the x100s offer , give me, that differs from my original X100. Thanks in advance for any thoughts on this
leolab
Member
a few small things
a few small things
from someone who had both, but kept X100 Original
1) higher res EVF, this does make a slight difference but neither EVF is stellar in my opinion
2)some woukd argue better AF but i sure couldnt tell the difference after the firmware updates for original
3) i believe there was an additional film sim or two with X100s, but not ones that i found useful (no acros, no classic chrome…)
4) newer 16mp sensor with xtrans…i prefer the workflow and output of the 12mp bayer sensor on original…it just seemed like it gave less harsh output
as i stated i kept the X100 original (mine is the black version which has nice glossy smooth black paint vs cheaper looking crinkle flat black finish of subsequent black X100 series). I originally tried out the X110s hoping for a clear benefit in operational speed (AF…) but i was disappointed.
I have since tried the X100t and f and those are notable improvements in operational speed, the 24mp sensor on the f, mated with the same old 23mm lens highlighted many of the lens weaknesses more than the 16 and 12mp sensors…if i were in the market now and not wed to the output of the old 12mp sensor, the x100t would be my choice
just my opinion of course
a few small things
from someone who had both, but kept X100 Original
1) higher res EVF, this does make a slight difference but neither EVF is stellar in my opinion
2)some woukd argue better AF but i sure couldnt tell the difference after the firmware updates for original
3) i believe there was an additional film sim or two with X100s, but not ones that i found useful (no acros, no classic chrome…)
4) newer 16mp sensor with xtrans…i prefer the workflow and output of the 12mp bayer sensor on original…it just seemed like it gave less harsh output
as i stated i kept the X100 original (mine is the black version which has nice glossy smooth black paint vs cheaper looking crinkle flat black finish of subsequent black X100 series). I originally tried out the X110s hoping for a clear benefit in operational speed (AF…) but i was disappointed.
I have since tried the X100t and f and those are notable improvements in operational speed, the 24mp sensor on the f, mated with the same old 23mm lens highlighted many of the lens weaknesses more than the 16 and 12mp sensors…if i were in the market now and not wed to the output of the old 12mp sensor, the x100t would be my choice
just my opinion of course
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Cameradecision is AI driven.
I like this one. Humans still involved.
https://photographylife.com/fujifilm-x100-series-comparison
My vote is for x100t as well.
Graybeard
Longtime IIIf User
In what ways is the x100 wearing out?
Darthfeeble
But you can call me Steve
I got my X100 when they first came out and have converted it to Infrared and it's still going strong. If anything is at it's service end it might be the batteries. They can affect the performance of the camera. As was mentioned, the bayer sensor has it's own look and for me is preferable.
Why stop at the X100s? Honestly, I’d try to get the X100F at least at this point. If cash is the road block, then ok. Go for the X100T. It is faster … in some ways the S was the worst one…but of course still nice enough.
lxmike
M2 fan.
Thanks for all your thoughts and views chaps, I had a GAS attack this afternoon and nearly pulled the trigger
willie_901
Veteran
Advantages of the X100 S over the X-100:
The same holds for the X100 T, F and V except for color banding as the S has almost no perceptible color banding. The T, F V also have incremental SNR improvements. However, the CPU capabilities of the T, F and V cameras increase so AF performance improves with each model.
- Significantly higher analog signal-to-noise ratio
- More analog dynamic range
- Color banding artifact levels (fixed pattern noise) are significantly lower
- The internal CPU has higher performance which improve AF
The same holds for the X100 T, F and V except for color banding as the S has almost no perceptible color banding. The T, F V also have incremental SNR improvements. However, the CPU capabilities of the T, F and V cameras increase so AF performance improves with each model.
shawn
Veteran
I think the x100s was the first camera to get phase detect pixels on the sensor for better AF performance compared to the x100. IME the biggest benefit with pd on mirrorless is that the camera can automatically know it is already focused, with CD AF systems the camera doesn't automatically know that, it has to defocus to check focus. So when you half press a CD system will refocus every time, a camera that also has PD detect doesn't automatically have to do that. Though some still do.
I have/had the x100, x100t and x100f. Of them the x100f is my favorite, the sensor is beautiful, camera is fast and responsive, it has the ISO dial on top and it has the ERF mode which I use. The x100v changes the lens, adds weather resistance (if you use a filter) and has a few of the newer film simulations. I would love if Fuji added the Classic Negative and Color Chrome Effect to the x100f.
Shawn
I have/had the x100, x100t and x100f. Of them the x100f is my favorite, the sensor is beautiful, camera is fast and responsive, it has the ISO dial on top and it has the ERF mode which I use. The x100v changes the lens, adds weather resistance (if you use a filter) and has a few of the newer film simulations. I would love if Fuji added the Classic Negative and Color Chrome Effect to the x100f.
Shawn
This may be true, but it was still a slow camera. The T was the first one where it felt almost fast. The F was the first one that focused fast and in
Low light.
Ste_S
Well-known
I've never had a problem with focus performance on the S, but then I'm happy with autofocus on the Nikon F4 (which is supposedly awful). However, I'm focussing on mostly static,not moving, subjects. YMMV.
Yeah, it would be more than ok for that of course...
DownUnder
Nikon Nomad
From my experience, this sums up most autofocus cameras.
I don't own a Fuji, but we are looking into buying one with a few lenses as our next digipurchase. Friends who do own them say they aren't really that great for anything that moves beyond small things blowing in the wind.
Try shooting any moving object with a Contax G1. When I'm taking anything that involves movement/action, I generally use it on manual focus. It's an older camera, I know, but so is the F4.
My D700s are also less than stellar with active subjects. My D800 is somewhat better, but no cigars to hand around here either...
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
There is a subtlety in X-Pro’s and X-100’s where I thought focusing was slow or difficult.
But first: with the original firmware version the focus was indeed slow. So, I updated firmware as soon as the updates came out. However, I noticed there were still times the AF hunted around. Disappointing.
The problem? Well, with the OVF (my preference) I never used the corrected AF frame. Consequently, I thought I was focusing on a nice contrasty object maybe 10’ away, but in reality I was really attempting to focus on a blank wall. Because parallax. Switching to the EVF, suddenly focus was faster because I was then focusing on the actual subject.
For the OVF, I don’t want the clutter that the additional corrected AF frame creates, so I’ve simply decided that within about 10’ I’ll just switch to the EVF to solve parallax and focus issues.
But first: with the original firmware version the focus was indeed slow. So, I updated firmware as soon as the updates came out. However, I noticed there were still times the AF hunted around. Disappointing.
The problem? Well, with the OVF (my preference) I never used the corrected AF frame. Consequently, I thought I was focusing on a nice contrasty object maybe 10’ away, but in reality I was really attempting to focus on a blank wall. Because parallax. Switching to the EVF, suddenly focus was faster because I was then focusing on the actual subject.
For the OVF, I don’t want the clutter that the additional corrected AF frame creates, so I’ve simply decided that within about 10’ I’ll just switch to the EVF to solve parallax and focus issues.
Last edited:
shawn
Veteran
That depends upon what model and lens you are talking about and how the camera is configured.
These are some of my original AF tests with the X Pro 2 and 55-200 lens. Floyd was moving a lot faster than a leaf blowing in the wind. (Edit: you can see I missed focus point on a couple in the first sequence and then the camera reacquired and focused on Floyd again... fast)
The 100-400 was even better, that thing would keep up with kicked soccer balls while shooing at 8fps.
Shawn
Pál_K
Cameras. I has it.
Those are excellent; I’m impressed. I assume you were using the Continuous focus setting.
shawn
Veteran
Yes, AF-C, zone focus (not tracking), drive set on high, high performance mode and AF-C set to focus priority. It hunted more in release priority. Those were taken in 2016 so earlier software.
Shawn
Shawn
Richard G
Veteran
As I scrolled down and down I expected that lovely dog to be licking the lens in the last shot.
shawn
Veteran
He would have had to stop running long enough to do that. 
He was just barking in excitement, not attacking. Poodles are very vocal and he had lots of fun testing AF that day.
Shawn
PS: sorry for all the pics but they highlight the AF performance of the XP2.
He was just barking in excitement, not attacking. Poodles are very vocal and he had lots of fun testing AF that day.
Shawn
PS: sorry for all the pics but they highlight the AF performance of the XP2.